RadheyRadhey108

I think it was more, "She's my mom, but you guys can be my moms too, since you love me so much." Kind of like how we can approach Krishna as a mother or father, and He accepts it, but Yashoda is still His mom

Sanjaya [Lincoln Logs] said to Dhritarastra [barbie], "Bhagavan Krishna having spoken thus to Arjuna [Cabbage-Patch Kid], displayed His real four-armed form and at last showed His two-armed form, thus encouraging the fearful Arjuna [Cabbage-Patch Kid]." Woops.

No. I just want someone I can have a conversation with that is on a similar level with me. All you do is criticize belief. I’d like to have a fellow believer to talk with when I’m on a Hindu religious forum. THERE’S NO PROOF FOR GOD! How many times do you need to be told this? Why do you post things insulting Lord Rama on a Hindu religious forum if you don’t want to be questioned about your motives and criticized for insulting our God? I don’t know if I have any good karma. That’s God’s decision. You might have better karma than me. I have no idea. I don’t know what my past lives were. I don’t know what I did in them. I’m not the one who said that belief in God is based on past actions. I don’t know why some people are believers and some people aren’t. I don’t really care to be quite honest. I’ve told you several times that God can’t be proven. You’re the one that wants scientific evidence for His existence, not me. I don’t follow a specific guru, so waste this on someone else. I haven’t judged anyone in South India, and I didn’t start that thread… why are you saying this to me?

Proof of what? No one can prove God. God is a matter of faith solely. If you have no faith, you can't believe in God. No matter what is told to you, you still won't believe b/c you have no faith. Divine service is serving Radha and Krishna (or whatever name you wish to call God) through everything you do. Are you the Divine Couple? Well, then I don't have to serve you. You aren't divine, so I won't render such service unto you. Sorry, but for me, the world doesn't revolve around you.

I also wish for them to feel accepted. They are our brothers and sisters, and we should treat them as such.

You aren't here for answers. You're only here to get in arguments. But, I can't blame you. This is the Age of Quarrel.

Could you possibly be the returned spirit of Nietzche? You sound like him. And, yes. Every belief about God is faith, and all of it is blind. Why do you post on Hindu religious forums if all you do is question and not accept any answers?

Theist, why do you lower your standards when you can get two beautiful wives like Ganesh has (even though the one on His right arm looks a little upset... jealousy issues perhaps?)?

He says he believes in Vishnu, but then insults His forms as Rama and Krishna. He's ridiculous. No other Hindu in the world that worships Vishnu refuses to recognize Rama and Krishna. He's ridiculous.

I'm not scared of Krishna. I love Him. I'm not scared of being tempted. I really don't care if I am. I'm just glad that I have Sri Sri Radha-Krishna to serve. All I want is to be a servant of Radharani and Lord Krishna. I don't think that Krishna was killed b/c He killed Vali as Rama. I think He was killed b/c that's how He chose to leave the earth. Do you even believe in God? If so, then how can you criticize ANYONE for believing anything about God? You can't prove God. I can't prove Krishna (which is the name I call God). And, if you don't believe in God, then why are you even on here asking questions about Him in the first place? To mock His devotees?

I don't think Catholics lie if they say they're going to heaven... it's their term for Goloka. Jannah sounds like Indraloka to me (since there's no God actually present in it, it's a pleasure-garden), and Sheol sounds like Yamaloka... so I really see nothing wrong w/ what they have to say. So, no, I wasn't making it like they were lying. I was just stating why your question is ridiculous: We haven't died yet, so how can we be in Goloka at the moment? You have to die first. That's why no one on earth is in Goloka right now. You say you believe in God. To believe in God means that you are acting on BLIND faith... you can't see God. All faith is blind, that's why we call it faith and not evidence. We can't prove God's existence in this material world. I don't understand how you can believe in God, and then criticize others for believing in something else completely un-provable as well. It's hypocritical. Goloka Vrindavan is the abode of Lord Vishnu's incarnation as Lord Krishna for Radha-Krishna devotees. Ram-Rajya is for Sita-Ram devotees. Vaikuntha is for devotees of Lakshmi-Narayan. They are for different devotees.

Thanks, LOL

Why are Catholics not in Heaven? Why are Muslims not in Jannah? Why are Jews not in Sheol? Why are Buddhists not in Nirvana? Your question is ridiculous.

I'm sorry for my rather rude post to you May we both increase in love and purity by the mercy of God!

Have you ever experienced the pleasures of Divine service? Obviously not. You clearly only care for yourself, if it doesn't make you happy to see people smile. It's spoken of in the scriptures (which you don't care for anyway). Do you believe in God? What is your basis? You're clearly faithless in anything that can't be proven, so why do you post here, on a religious forum?

Honestly, what do you even know anything about Shiva Ji?

Did the creator of Superman claim him to be based on a real person? Has he had a religion centered around him or a form of him for thousands of years? Lord Rama prayed to Lord Shiva as an example. He wanted to show us that it's okay to ask for Lord Shiva's help. No, God never dies. No one ever truly dies. But, when anyone takes form (including God) there has to be some end to their stay here... that end is the dying of the body. Lord Ram had to end His lila somehow, and that's how He ended it. But, Sita Devi certainly didn't die like a mortal (b/c She's an incarnation of Lakshmi/Radharani), so do you think that She's purely divine, but Lord Ram isn't? If Sai Baba said it thousands of years ago, and then is reported to have done it, then I might believe it. If all you want is proof, then why do you even believe in God? No one can prove God's existence. You have to go on faith. So, there's nothing really wrong with it, but if all that you can believe is what you can experience with the senses, then you shouldn't even believe in God.

You are so right... making women into sex-objects for every man on earth to enjoy through disgusting photos is much better than homosexuality, where the couple actually love each other. I’d like to meet the college-age person who doesn’t already know their sexuality. Also, it’s not like they force students to take the class. Most of the students who will be taking the class will probably already know their sexual preference (and, if it ‘changes’ then that’s probably how it was in the first place and they were in denial).

I agree. We should just accept and love them as we would our own brothers and sisters. It's not like they can force themselves to change. It's the way they are. You certainly know a lot more than those who say that they avoid homosexuals b/c they creep them out with their 'unnatural' tendencies.

The pleasure is transcendental. We are able to serve Radha-Krishna. What greater pleasure could there possibly be than to lighten Their Divine, Lotus-like Faces with smiles? They are the Divine Couple. They dance and sing in the forests of Vrindavan. Radharani plays with Her sakhis and Krishna plays with His gopa friends. They praise each other's glories. They are the most loving of all beings, and Their love is constantly increasing for each other and for us. You need to be a devotee of God and see all beings with equanimity. Certainly beyond our material reach or senses. Sri Krishna says so in the Gita (but you've already shown that you don't believe or care about what He says in the Gita anyway).

That doesn't matter to realist. He needs to see Krishna do these things with his physical eyes, since he can't trust the scriptures on anything I guess, since he thinks that Lord Krishna was a liar and a conartist (sorry realist if I'm wrong... I'm just inferring... kinda like how you were inferring that Lord Rama was a coward).

Well, Buddhism only has two major schools... Hinduism has hundreds of Sampradayas branching off of four major schools (Vaishnava, Shakta, Shaiva, and Advaita)... so I really don't think it's our right to judge it. Lord Rama didn't refute the scriptures, but Lord Krishna did specify that He only wanted a leaf, fruit, a flower, or water offered to Him. So, I'd say that He was indirectly refuting passages which seem to (at the very least) suggest animal sacrifice by not mentioning them in the things that He wanted offered to Him. When people didn't listen, He incarnated as Lord Buddha... that's what I think anyway. You have the right to your own opinion, of course. "Monks, a lay follower should not engage in five types of business. Which five? Business in weapons, business in human beings, business in meat, business in intoxicants, and business in poison. These are the five types of business that a lay follower should not engage in." -Pali Canon; Vanijja Sutta, Anguttara, 5.177 Then Maha-Kasyapaika-gotra asked, “If it is very important to uphold the impropriety of meat-eating, would it not then be wrong to give meat to those who do not want meat?” [The Buddha replied:] “Excellent, noble son, excellent! You have understood my intention. One who protects the authentic Dharma should not do that. Noble son, henceforth I do not permit my disciples to eat meat. If I have said that [one should view] the country’s alms-food as the flesh of one’s son, how could I permit the eating of meat? I teach that the eating of meat cuts off Great Loving-kindness.” “Blessed One, why did you permit the eating of meat that was blameless in three respects?” “Because I stipulated these three types of blameless as a provisional basis of training; I now discard them.” “Blessed One, what was your intention in talking of the ninefold great benefit and the abandoning of the ten types of meat?” “Because those pronouncements were stipulated to restrict the eating of meat; they are also withdrawn.” “Blessed One, what was your intention in stating that meat and fish are wholesome foodstuffs?” “I did not say that meat and fish are wholesome foodstuffs, but I have said that sugar-cane, winter-rice, ordinary rice, wheat, barley, green lentils, black lentils, molasses, sugar, honey, ghee, milk and sesame oil are wholesome foodstuffs. If I have taught that even the various garments for covering the body should be dyed an unattractive colour, then how much more so [i.e. undesirable] attachment to the taste of meat foods!” “In that case, does it not follow that the five milk products, sesame, sesame oil, sugar-cane sap, conch-shell, silk and so forth also violate the precepts?” “Don’t cleave to the views of the Nirgranthas! I have imposed the bases of training upon you with a different intention: I stipulate that you should not even eat meat blameless in the three respects. Even those meats other than the ten [previously forbidden] kinds should be abandoned. The meat of corpses should also be abandoned. All creatures sense the odor and are frightened by meat-eaters, no matter if they are moving around or resting. If a person eats asafetida or garlic, everybody else feels uncomfortable and alienated – whether in a crowd of many people or in the midst of many creatures, they all know that that person has eaten them. Similarly, all creatures can recognize a person who eats meat and, when they catch the odor, they are frightened by the terror of death. Wherever that person roams, the beings in the waters, on dry land or in the sky are frightened. Thinking that they will be killed by that person, they even swoon or die. For these reasons, Bodhisattva-mahasattvas do not eat meat. Even though they may appear to eat meat on account of those to be converted, since they do not actually eat ordinary food, then how much less so meat! Noble son, when many hundreds of years have elapsed after I have gone, there will be no stream-enterers, once-returners, non-returners or arhats. In the age of the Dharma’s decline, there will be monks who preserve the vinaya and abhidharma and who have a multitude of rituals, but who also look after their physical well-being, who highly esteem various kinds of meat, whose humours are disturbed, who are troubled by hunger and thirst, whose clothing looks a fright, who have robes with splashes of colour like a cowherd or a fowler, who behave like cats, who assert that they are arhats, who are pained by many hurts, whose bodies will be soiled with their own feces and urine, who dress themselves well as though they were munis, who dress themselves as sramanas [ascetic wanderers], though they are not, and who hold spurious writings to be the authentic Dharma. These people destroy what I have devised – the vinaya, rites, comportment and the authentic utterances that free and liberate one from attachment to what is improper, selecting and reciting passages from each of the sutras according to their inclinations. Thus there will appear [bogus] sramanas, sons of Shakyamuni [the Buddha], who will claim that, ‘According to our vinaya, the Blessed One has said that alms of meat-stuffs are acceptable’ and who will concoct their own [scriptures] and contradict each other. “Moreover, noble son, there will also be those who accept raw cereals, meat and fish, do their own cooking and [stock-pile] pots of sesame oil; who frequent leather-makers, parasol-makers and royalty … The person I call a monk is one who abandons those things.” “Blessed One, what should be done by monks, nuns, male lay followers of Buddhism and female lay followers of Buddhism, who depend upon what is offered to them, to purify alms-food that contains meat in such places where the food has not been verified?” “Noble son, I have taught that it does not contradict the vinaya in any way if they wash it [i.e. the non-meat food] with water and then eat it. If it appears that the food in such places contains a lot of prepared meat, it should be rejected. There is no fault if one vessel touches another but the food is not actually mixed together. I say that even meat, fish, game, dried hooves and scraps of meat left over by others constitute an infraction. Previously, I taught this in cases arising from the needs of the situation. Now, on this occasion, I teach the harm arising from meat-eating. Being the time when I shall pass into Parinirvana, this is a comprehensive declaration.” -Maha Parinirvana Sutra

Krishna is Vishnu. I don't see why you differentiate between Them. They are one. If I change clothes, I'm not a different person. If I go by my middle name or a nickname, I'm not a different person. I'm still the same. I would quote the Gita when Krishna says that He remembers all of His past activities (since He's God), but you obviously don't trust anything in it. I didn't realize you were talking of Shridi Sai Baba. He never claimed to be God. Sathya Sai Baba claims that. Shridi Sai Baba was a devotee of Lord Krishna. He never claimed otherwise, and he certainly never called anyone a fool who refused to call him God (a claim he never even made for himself).

I would rather go to Goloka any day. Goloka is where Sri Sri Radha-Krishna are. I am not pure enough to enter it at this moment, therefore I can't 'choose' it. Also, it is a place without suffering. I hate to see suffering and I hate suffering myself, so I would much rather choose it (since no matter which other Loka you incarnate in (BrahmaLoka, IndraLoka, etc...) there is still suffering through death, material attachments, etc...) Arjuna was told specifically by Lord Krishna to do something. He didn't want to fight for material wealth, but Lord Krishna asked him to. Not for material wealth, but so that the people of the Dwarapa Yuga would be protected from the viscious tyrants that were the Kurus. Indra isn't pure enough to enter Goloka at this time. He is very attached to sense enjoyment. Also, it is his specific duty until his death to be the Indra of our current universe. He might incarnate in Goloka after his death. I'm not sure. In the next universe, there will be a different Indra, and the current Indra will be able to move on to another incarnation somewhere else.

So now Lord Krishna is nothing more than a conartist? Is that what you mean?